Pope Francis: ‘Evolution … is not inconsistent with the notion of creation’

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimR-OCDS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
rossum said:
No. I was merely pointing out that the original question was skewed. Theists were allowed a head start, with nothing and God. Atheists were expected to start with pure nothing. In order to remedy the imbalance, I added the multiverse to the atheist side. That makes for a much fairer discussion.

By saying that the current universe arose from the multiverse it is understood that the multiverse was there and is real.

rossum
Click to expand...
The only multiverse I know is Shakespeare ! 😃
 
Al_Moritz said:
You mean science can only deal with the physical world. Materialism is a worldview, the physical world is a fact of God’s creation. That some or even many scientists are materialists is a different matter, certainly different from science itself.
Click to expand...
Not at all. Science is performed by men who are self-limited by materialism.

Peace,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The multiverse is an unproven idea. Right now, it has no scientific evidence.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Not just right now, but there can never be in principle any scientific, observational evidence. The reason for this is the particle horizon: the maximum distance from which particles (i.e. also particles carrying information) could have traveled to the observer in the age of the universe. It represents the portion of the universe which we could have conceivably observed at the present day. Any other universe would lie outside this particle horizon.

Certainly, the multiverse hypothesis may be called a hypothesis from science, but it hardly qualifies as science proper.
 
edwest2 said:
I don’t agree. The Bible is a closed book. That is, it has been examined very closely. Sacred Scripture is also called the Word of the Lord. Winning or losing is not the goal - only truth. I see this debate brought up here endlessly. Regarding the Bible, the Church clarifies. It looks at new social and scientific events and discoveries through the light of Scripture.

I am never frustrated because I trust the Church and only the Church to instruct me about this subject. Science can only deal with materialism. It cannot study God or the soul, so any connection with the soul and early humans has no scientific backing whatsoever.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I really cant even relate to your post-- what debate are you talking about. Are you saying that Catholic understanding of the Bible never changes in light of historical criticism or in light of new and deeper understandings about authorship, or insight from some of the doctors of the church? Are you saying that there are no ambiguous areas of insight into the Bible that have changed over the course of history even in the Catholic Church-- even insights that deepen but are consistent with past understanding?

Scripture is the word of the lord but doesn’t human understanding of it deepen over time- even Catholic understanding?

I am not frustrated about interpretation of scripture-- I was referring to the frustration I have with some atheists who use a double standard when debating the subject…
 
rossum said:
Starts? You are assuming the existence of time alongside God. You are also in danger of making God into an infinite regress. If God is infinitely old, and God had a start then you have an infinite regress.
Click to expand...
Not at all. There was no time flow prior to God as He is eternal. So there was no ‘before’ God and hence no infinite regress.
 
rossum said:
If God creates “everything”, then He creates Himself, since He is not nothing. God creates everything except Himself. You left out the very important qualifier at the end.

rossum
Click to expand...
Isnt that a fairly obvious thing?

When a blacksmith tells me he made some horse shoes, I don’t have to ask him if he also made himself.

If God the Creator made the universe and the flow of time, why is there a requirement to state that He did not make Himself?
 
buffalo said:
Several quotes were cited saying if science proclaims against the Bible, the Bible should retreat. It is the belief of many here.
Click to expand...
Post numbers and quotes, please. Give me just one of the “many”.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
VATICAN CITY (RNS) Pope Francis on Monday (Oct. 27) waded into the controversial debate over the origins of human life, saying the big bang theory did not contradict the role of a divine creator, but even required it.

The pope was addressing the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which gathered at the Vatican to discuss “Evolving Concepts of Nature.”

“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said.

Read More

Jim
Click to expand...
I was taught about evolution in Catholic school and was told by my confirmation teacher, our priest, that Adam and Eve was a story. So when Pope Francis made these comments, I did not find them noteworthy. Also, I knew that a priest, Monseigneur Georges Lemaître, was the first to propose the big bang theory. Nothing in either of these two theories are controversial in the Catholic Church. I actually felt pride that we’re the religion that celebrates intellectualism and decries ignorance.

I was disappointed when the neighborhood Catholic high schooler recently told me that she was unsure of evolution. They did not really discuss evolution in biology and the kids were left to figure things out for themselves. This was disheartening because the kids in our local public schools are way ahead of our Catholic school students in STEM areas. Now I can see why. I had no idea that our Catholic schools had changed, degenerated academically. It’s a shame. I hope the Pope’s recent reminder that our Church does not condone belief in magic is not ignored. God set forth the universe that formed our ordered world. As we grow in intelligence, science helps us discover new facets of God’s creation. We should celebrate these discoveries, not hide from God’s wonderful gifts.

I highly doubt that God sits up in heaven every day playing like a Sim Earth video game master. He’s not that lame.
 
buffalo said:
Criticize away. God did tell us the purpose of creation. When one criticizes the design of the eye for example, as being less than optimal, we do it from our own perspective not the designers. So for years science did criticize the backwards wiring design of the eye as evidence for evo then we learn this -

Retinal glial cells acting as optical fibers shuttle longer wavelengths of light to individual cones.
Click to expand...
My goodness, buffalo, exactly how long have you been holding out on us? Pray tell, what IS the purpose of God’s creation? All of mankind is waiting to know! :yup:

I will not be addressing your analogy to the eye, or the link that you gave, because you have not answered any of my former questions. Stop deflecting.
 
Al_Moritz said:
Not just right now, but there can never be in principle any scientific, observational evidence. The reason for this is the particle horizon: the maximum distance from which particles (i.e. also particles carrying information) could have traveled to the observer in the age of the universe. It represents the portion of the universe which we could have conceivably observed at the present day. Any other universe would lie outside this particle horizon.

Certainly, the multiverse hypothesis may be called a hypothesis from science, but it hardly qualifies as science proper.
Click to expand...
In principle, I like the multiverse hypothesis - it’s a neat solution to the question of human free will in light of God’s omniscience. As God, He sees all possible futures and all possible outcomes of every decision we make all at once.
 
Finally, a little light over the “media frenzy.”

ncregister.com/daily-news/vatican-astronomer-dismisses-media-frenzy-over-popes-words-on-big-bang-theo/

When the Church, especially a Pope, says something that seems to support evolutionary theory, the Church is praised. When the Church, especially a Pope, says something that goes against current thinking about evolutionary theory, the Church and the Pope are condemned. Often followed by, “He - whoever it may be - is not a scientist.”

Best,
Ed
 
PeopleB4Things said:
I was taught about evolution in Catholic school and was told by my confirmation teacher, our priest, that Adam and Eve was a story. So when Pope Francis made these comments, I did not find them noteworthy. Also, I knew that a priest, Monseigneur Georges Lemaître, was the first to propose the big bang theory. Nothing in either of these two theories are controversial in the Catholic Church. I actually felt pride that we’re the religion that celebrates intellectualism and decries ignorance.

I was disappointed when the neighborhood Catholic high schooler recently told me that she was unsure of evolution. They did not really discuss evolution in biology and the kids were left to figure things out for themselves. This was disheartening because the kids in our local public schools are way ahead of our Catholic school students in STEM areas. Now I can see why. I had no idea that our Catholic schools had changed, degenerated academically. It’s a shame. I hope the Pope’s recent reminder that our Church does not condone belief in magic is not ignored. God set forth the universe that formed our ordered world. As we grow in intelligence, science helps us discover new facets of God’s creation. We should celebrate these discoveries, not hide from God’s wonderful gifts.

I highly doubt that God sits up in heaven every day playing like a Sim Earth video game master. He’s not that lame.
Click to expand...
Science cannot study God. A reading of scientific texts ascribes purely natural causes to everything, and as new discoveries are made, God cannot be included as part of the explanation. Again, God and the soul do not exist in science. There are no peer-reviewed papers that give God credit for any discoveries or observations.

Believing or not believing in this theory has no practical effect on anything.

Best,
Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Finally, a little light over the “media frenzy.”

ncregister.com/daily-news/vatican-astronomer-dismisses-media-frenzy-over-popes-words-on-big-bang-theo/

When the Church, especially a Pope, says something that seems to support evolutionary theory, the Church is praised. When the Church, especially a Pope, says something that goes against current thinking about evolutionary theory, the Church and the Pope are condemned. Often followed by, “He - whoever it may be - is not a scientist.”
Click to expand...
And when he makes comments about the poor, wages, etc, it’s “He’s not an economist.”

When he talks about the death penalty and life imprisonment, it’s “He should get his nose out of politics” or “invite the serial killers etc to live at the Vatican if he wants them all free.”

🤷
 
RGCheek said:
Isnt that a fairly obvious thing?
Click to expand...
It needs to be stated when discussing theology/philosophy.
When a blacksmith tells me he made some horse shoes, I don’t have to ask him if he also made himself.
Click to expand...
As with “God made man”, there is no need. If you claimed, “The blacksmith made everything,” then you would need to qualify the ‘everything’. It is the ‘everything’ where the problem lies.
If God the Creator made the universe and the flow of time, why is there a requirement to state that He did not make Himself?
Click to expand...
That depends on how you define “universe”. If you define ‘universe’ as “all that exists”, then God did not make that universe. If you define ‘universe’ as the STEM universe of science, then God could have made it.

rossum
 
Thinking about the Pope and evolution … … …

I bet that Pope Francis knows the difference between the evolution model used in the medical arena and the 21st century science of human evolution.
 
edwest2 said:
Science cannot study God. A reading of scientific texts ascribes purely natural causes to everything, and as new discoveries are made, God cannot be included as part of the explanation. Again, God and the soul do not exist in science. There are no peer-reviewed papers that give God credit for any discoveries or observations.

Believing or not believing in this theory has no practical effect on anything.

Best,
Ed
Click to expand...
I humbly disagree Ed. Science is just one way we come to know God. God set the big bang into action which means whatever developed from it is all his. And science is how we learn about his great gift to us, our world, our universe. God and the intellectual development of his children are intertwined and can not be separated.
 
Monkey1976 said:
In principle, I like the multiverse hypothesis - it’s a neat solution to the question of human free will in light of God’s omniscience. As God, He sees all possible futures and all possible outcomes of every decision we make all at once.
Click to expand...
Here are some problems with the multiverse: there can be fake universes as well as one with a God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top